Delhi High Court Confronts Repeated Threats Against Judges

The Delhi High Court is addressing a concerning pattern of threats and disruptive behavior by an individual facing criminal contempt of court proceedings, Adeeshwar Singhal. Despite repeated directives to appear in person, Singhal continues to join proceedings virtually while allegedly issuing threats and using derogatory language towards the bench.

Contempt Proceedings and Initial Disruptions

Contempt proceedings against Singhal were initiated last year following a reference from a district judge at Karkardooma Courts. Court records indicate that on April 9, 2025, Singhal participated in a hearing via video conference and made what the court described as “scandalous and derogatory remarks” against the judge [Law Chakra], [The Law Advice]. He also repeatedly interrupted the proceedings and disregarded the court’s directions, continuing this behavior even after receiving warnings.

Escalation of Disruptive Behavior and Court Responses

On May 23, 2025, the High Court issued a notice to Singhal, requiring his in-person appearance on August 1, 2025. However, he failed to comply. Subsequently, bailable warrants were issued on November 6, 2025. When he appeared via video conferencing on that date, Singhal reportedly refused to disclose his location and declared he would not participate in what he termed “stupid proceedings” [Bar & Bench].

Non-Bailable Warrants and Departure from the Country

During a hearing on December 2, 2025, the court learned that the bailable warrants could not be executed. Singhal again appeared via video conference and allegedly used “derogatory and contemptuous words” against the judges, leading the court to remove him from the proceedings and issue non-bailable warrants [The Law Advice]. On January 8, 2026, police informed the Court that Singhal had left the country [Bar & Bench].

Recent Directive for In-Person Appearance

Despite Singhal’s continued virtual participation and alleged threats, the Delhi High Court, comprising Justices Navin Chawla and Ravinder Dudeja, has directed him to appear in person on March 23, 2026. The court warned that failure to comply will result in “appropriate coercive steps” to ensure his presence [The Law Advice], [Bar & Bench]. The court has also appointed senior advocate Amit George as amicus curiae in the criminal contempt proceedings.

This case highlights the challenges courts face in addressing disruptive behavior and ensuring respect for judicial proceedings, even in the age of virtual hearings.